Community Leaders Meeting - Rethinking I-94 Phase 2 March 23, 2021
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Community Leaders Meeting Rethinking I-94 Phase 2 March 23, 2021
1. Welcome
2. Study status update and look ahead
3. Evaluation criteria overview
Agenda 4. Small group discussion
5. Large group discussion
6. Next Steps
Present evaluation criteria
Gather feedback on evaluation criteria
Meeting Small group discussions
Goals Gather feedback on engaging the
community
Project Status Study Status Policy Advisory Committee Update and Livability Look Ahead NEPA
Study Status Update and Status Update: Policy Advisory Committee Look Ahead
Study Status Update and Status Update: Livability Look Ahead
Study Status Update and Status Update: Public Involvement Look Ahead
Study Status Update and Look Ahead
Phase 2 Study Process
Scoping Decision Document
Mainline and access/interchange alternatives for
Tier 1 evaluation
Environmental
Tier 1 Environmental Impact Statement
Process Preferred mainline alternative and access locations
outcomes
Tier 2
Specific projects to integrate access alternatives
with mainline alternativeI-94 is a barrier that continues to divide
Bikeability/walkability is a primary need
Economic and environmental needs in the
purpose and need
What we’ve Reducing VMT is a need
heard from Generator of unhealthy are - air quality is a need
Noise generator
you Need transit advantages
Affordable housing, gentrification, equitable
development
SustainabilityNEPA/MEPA Process Story
NEPA/MEPA Process Story
NEPA/MEPA Process Story
X X X X X X X X X
NEPA/MEPA X X X X X X X X X
Process
Story X X X X X X X X
X X X X X X X X XNEPA/MEPA Process Story
Evaluation Criteria
Used to evaluate alternatives
First focuses on the
alternative’s ability to address
project needs
Evaluation Secondly focuses on the
Criteria alternative’s impacts to
identified social, economic
and environmental (SEE)
resources
In Tier 1 EIS process will
incorporate the ability of an
alternative to address project
goals+ The environmental process will result in documents
at three distinct stages:
1. Scoping Document (SD)/Draft Scoping Decision
Document(DSDD) and Scoping Decision Document (SDD)
Evaluation 2. Tier 1 EIS
Criteria 3. Tier 2 – project document
The Scoping Decision Document (SDD) will identify
a reasonable range of alternatives that will be
studied in greater detail in the EIS. The Tier 1 EIS will result in selection of a preferred
mainline alternative for I-94 and
interchange/access locations/overpasses where
improvements will be needed. There will be more
detail on the alternatives developed for the
Evaluation mainline and interchanges/access during this
process. A broad corridor aesthetic will be
Criteria established.
Tier 2 documents will be used to get into detailed
concepts, operations, pedestrian/bicycle designs,
landscaping, aesthetics, etc. These documents will
identify what specifically will be constructed. At the Scoping stage, evaluation criteria will be
Evaluation high-level and will be used to eliminate
alternatives with fatal flaws and identify
Criteria alternatives to move forward for additional
study in the Tier 1Category Evaluation Criteria Measurement
Infrastructure Condition Pavement Condition Does or does not address
pavement condition
Bridge Condition Does or does not address bridge
condition
Mobility Systemwide Vehicle Hours Traveled (VHT);
Evaluation Mobility
Corridor Mobility
Person Hours Traveled (PHT)
Travel Speeds (average over
Criteria SDD corridor)
Corridor Throughput Person Throughput (people per
mile, per hour)
Interchange Area Vehicles Hours Traveled (VHT) in
Mobility Interchange Area
Interchange Area Person Hours Traveled (PHT) in
Thoughput Interchange AreaCategory Evaluation Criteria Measurement
Mobility Freight Mobility Freight Travel Times
Travel Time How long it takes to drive the
Reliability corridor during different times
of the day. Is it consistent or
does it vary?
Evaluation Connectivity Intersection density; Access to
adjacent land uses along the
Criteria SDD Transit Mobility
corridor
Transit Travel Times in the
Corridor; Transit Travel Times in
Interchange Area
Transit Reliability How long it takes for busses to
drive the corridor during
different times of the day. Is it
consistent or does it vary?Category Evaluation Criteria Measurement
Environmental Justice Potential for Access to economic
disproportionate opportunities (jobs) and other
impact and/or daily needs for EJ populations;
adverse effect to Exposure to air, water, and noise
EJ populations pollution for EJ populations;
Potential for relocation impacts
Evaluation Historic/Archaeological Potential impact
to EJ populations
Number of historical resources
Criteria SDD to historical
resources
impacted
Potential impact Number of archaeological
to archaeological resources impacted
resources
Section 4(f) - recreational Potential impact Number of Section 4(f)
resources to resource resources impacted
Section 6(f) - recreational Potential impact Number of Section 6(f)
resources with special to resource properties impacted
federal fundingCategory Evaluation Criteria Measurement
Contaminated Properties Impact to sites Number of known contaminated
with potential for sites impacted
hazardous
materials
Right of Way Adjacent property Acreage of impacts and
Evaluation
impacts anticipated number of property
relocations
Criteria SDD
Water Pollution / Impervious Acres
Stormwater Surface Area
Cost Estimated Dollars (risk-based cost range)
Construction Cost
Maintenance Estimated Dollars (risk-based cost range)
Maintenance Cost
Consistency with Consistency with Is the alternative consistent with
Regional Plans Regional Plans regional plans?Evaluation The Tier 1 EIS and Tier 2 evaluation criteria will
incorporate Livability Framework items related
Criteria to: sense of place, economics, connectivity,
health and the environment, and equityCategory Evaluation Criteria Measurement
Infrastructure Condition Pavement Condition Does or does not address
pavement condition
Bridge Condition Does or does not address bridge
condition
Evaluation Other Infrastructure Does or does not address
Condition - Retaining retaining wall condition
Criteria Tier Safety
Walls
Network Crashes Crashes and Crash Rate
1 EIS Reduction; Crash Cost
Reduction
Mobility Systemwide Vehicle Hours Traveled (VHT);
Mobility Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT);
Person Hours Traveled (PHT)
Corridor Mobility Travel Speeds (average over
corridor)
Corridor Throughput Person Throughput (people per
mile, per hour)Category Evaluation Criteria Measurement
Mobility Interchange Area Vehicles Hours Traveled (VHT) in
Mobility Interchange Area
Interchange Area Person Hours Traveled (PHT) in
Thoughput Interchange Area
Evaluation Freight Mobility
Travel Time
Freight Travel Times
How long it takes to drive the
Criteria Tier Reliability corridor during different times
of the day. Is it consistent or
1 EIS Connectivity
does it vary?
Intersection density; Access to
adjacent land uses along the
corridor
Transit Mobility Transit Travel Times in the
Corridor; Transit Travel Times in
Interchange AreaCategory Evaluation Criteria Measurement
Mobility Transit Reliability How long it takes for busses to
drive the corridor during
different times of the day. Is it
consistent or does it vary?
Evaluation Drainage Capacity Address
Stormwater and
Does or does not address
stormwater and catch basin
Criteria Tier Catch Basin
Capacity
capacity
1 EIS Walkability / Bikeability Non-Motorized
Connectivity and
Does the alternative address
poor Multimodal Level of
Performance Service - ranking user comfort
on pedestrian and bicycle
facilities on a scale of A to F,
with A being excellent and F
being failed.; Distance between
Crossings; Travel Time between
Origin-Destination PairsCategory Evaluation Criteria Measurement
Safety on Intersecting Network Crashes Crashes and Crash Rate
Streets Reduction; Crash Cost Reduction
Environmental Justice Potential for Access to economic
Evaluation
disproportionate opportunities (jobs) and other
impact and/or daily needs for EJ populations;
adverse effect to Exposure to air, water, and noise
Criteria Tier EJ populations pollution for EJ populations;
Potential for relocation impacts
1 EIS Historic/Archaeological Potential impact
to EJ populations
Number of historical resources
to historical impacted, and impacts
resources determined to be negative/bad.
Potential impact Number of archaeological
to archaeological resources impacted, and
resources impacts determined to be
negative/bad.Category Evaluation Criteria Measurement
Section 4(f) - recreational Potential impact Number of Section 4(f)
resources to resource resources determined to be
negatively impacted
Section 6(f) - recreational Potential impact Number of Section 6(f)
Evaluation
resources with special to resource properties determined to be
federal funding negatively impacted
Criteria Tier Contaminated Properties Impact to sites Number of known contaminated
1 EIS
with potential for sites impacted
hazardous
materials
Right of Way Adjacent property Acreage of impacts and
impacts anticipated number of property
relocations
Air Quality Potential impact Does the alternative meet air
to resource quality standardsCategory Evaluation Criteria Measurement
Noise Potential impact Does the alternative exceed
to public health federal noise thresholds
and welfare from
traffic related
noise pollution
Evaluation Threatened &
Endangered Species
Potential impact
to threatened and
What is the threat risk to
different species? It is
Criteria Tier endangered
species
anticipated that a “no effect”
and “no adverse effect” would
1 EIS be considered “low”. A “may
adversely affect” would be
considered “medium”, and
“adversely affect” would be
considered “high”.
Wetlands Potential impact Acres and type of wetland
to resource resource impacted
Floodplain Potential impact Acres of floodplain impacted
to resourceCategory Evaluation Criteria Measurement
Flooding Potential to Locations with increased
increase flood flooding potential
conditions
Water Pollution / Impervious Acres
Evaluation
Stormwater Surface Area
Sense of Place Opportunities for Opportunities to create features
Criteria Tier gathering spaces,
cultural and
or amenities in partnership with
communities to enhance sense
1 EIS
historic of place
representation
and art, and green
spaces
Equity Distribution of Enhances transportation choices
transportation for individuals
resources across
communitiesCategory Evaluation Criteria Measurement
Economics Opportunities for Employment opportunities
job and business (jobs) accessible within 30-
accessibility, real minute travel time
estate
development,
Evaluation revenue, housing
opportunity and
Criteria Tier Health and the
affordability
Opportunities to Acreage that supports green
1 EIS Environment improve quality of
life, comfortable
spaces or land uses that benefit
quality of life and the
environment, and environment
well-being through
green spaces and
land useCategory Evaluation Criteria Measurement
Connections Opportunities to Percent of planned non-
use infrastructure motorized facility-miles that are
to connect completed
communities
physically and
Evaluation Cost
socially
Estimated Dollars (risk-based cost range)
Criteria Tier Construction Cost
1 EIS
Estimated Benefit- Net Benefits; Benefits/Cost
Cost Ration in Dollars
Maintenance Estimated Dollars (risk-based cost range)
Maintenance Cost
Consistency with Consistency with Is the alternative consistent with
Regional Plans Regional Plans regional plans?Small Group Questions
Are there additional evaluation criteria that should be
Discussion considered?
Are there other measurements that should be considered?
How could I-94 better reflect the needs of your community? Small Group Discussion Report Out
Flaw with purpose and need
travel accessibility – efficient travel in both directions in ecologically
friendly way
Transit – fuel efficiency
What we Disconnect of goals at different levels
Reducing VMT central
heard Continue to organize around public comment but concerns submitted
are not represented in presentations
Concern too many measures / evaluation criteria
Agreement / statement that moving freight is important but we should
be talking about moving people – how many people can move within
the corridor
Why assume this freeway needs to be rebuilt as is or expanded
Goals within the corridor
Continuing comment reducing fatalities/injuries Small Group Discussion Report Out (Continued)
Prioritize safety around where people are injured or killed not fender
benders
Use access not mobility
What we Reduce VMT / STAC recommendation
15-minute city concept – access to things they need
heard
Equity and access should be tier 1 rather than tier 2 priorities
If we cared about health of community adjacent we’d fill I-94 in
Incorporate Environmental Quality Board climate change impacts
measures that are under discussion at EQB
Defeating induced demand as criteria,
People hour traveled not vehicle travel
Reduce VMT
incorporate more of 280/94 area (just north and intersecting roads) Small Group Discussion Report Out (Continued)
Include frontage roads
Travel time variability not a priority – we expect to exist,
Prioritize health impacts for neighborhoods – do no harm – air
quality/access/food security/people to be healthier measures such as
noise/particulate impacts on health
What we
Social risk factors as they impact peoples health,
Be explicit about trade-offs in the decision-making – EX: if we prioritize
travel time what’s the trade off for air quality
heard Other metrics
The use and elevation of telecommuting recently, we’re working in
different ways and the impact on the system – looking at future and
document doesn’t reflect that yet
Average emission CO2/NOX) per mile traveled per person along/across
the corridor
How wide are we thinking for corridor, so many trips are short trips= are
we looking at holistically from Green Line to Marshall (B Line)Next Steps Next Community Leaders Meeting: 04/27/2021
Time: 10:00 AMYou can also read
